Rev, you have a real problem either with not reading the posts of others carefully, or inserting your own biases into them.
I IMPLIED quite clearly that I would not be moving posts since Doug is the Administrator (the boss) and he would not allow that (yet) in this case.
I went back to Darron’s post you referred to and read it carefully. I suggest you do the same. While he expressed his annoyance with your method of posting, he was certainly well within the guidelines of this forum.
I’m not sure if you were trying to copy what you found distressing about Darron’s post, but you seemed to have missed your own point. I think what you wanted was:
I reread your original post, and this question is nowhere in that post. If you had posted this instead of all the extraneous garbage we would not have gone around for six pages berating you for excessive and obfuscatory verbiage. You have finally asked a question we can discuss
To repeat myself, while he expressed his annoyance with your method of posting, he was certainly well within the guidelines of this forum.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the juice of Sapho that thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains. The stains become a warning. It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
The Mentat Mantra,
recited by Piter De Vries
I must not let my passion interfere with my reason. That is not good. That is bad.
Piter De Vries
Rev, you have a real problem either with not reading the posts of others carefully…
“I” have a real problem? I found nothing distressing about the post of Darron, which I quoted. It was actually his post that confirmed what the title of this post says the topic ought to be about.
When DarronS said: “Baumeister’s research is not pseudoscience”. This was exactly the point I sought to make.
Here again is what Darron wrote. He said:
I checked into Baumeister’s research, and this is not pseudoscience. He and his team developed a hypothesis, designed experiments to test the hypothesis, conducted the experiments, reached a conclusion based on empirical evidence, then published their results for other researchers to read and test. This is how scientists work.
NOTE: I rejoiced when Darron, not me, said THIS IS NOT PSEUDOSCIENCE.
RevLGKing - 04 August 2012 10:31 AM. I repeat, “In answer to my question in the title of the thread, it was DS who wrote: “...You (LGK) have finally asked a question we can discuss.”
Nobody needs to leave the Forum, folks. If some of you aren’t interested in what others write, it’s very simple not to respond.
I agree. Now may I ask: Is it wise for members of such an important forum as CFI to simply ignore what is now being recognised, world-wide, as the exciting new science of self-control?
In the book, WILLPOWER—Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength—the story of this new science is told by the scientist, researcher, professor of social psychology and author of more than 450 scientific papers, Roy M. Baumeister, of Florida State University who made it happen. He was helped to write the book by the award winning science writer of the New York Times, John Tierney.
Baumeister’s research clearly shows that this new science, is about things which lie at the curious intersection of science and behaviour. These things are affecting almost every aspect of our lives—why we do, or do not, procrastinate; yield to dangerous temptations; exercise regularly; save for retirement; deal with addictions more efficiently and more intelligently and other elusive areas of human psychology—why we go on thwarting ourselves when we really know better. Interestingly, research discovered the fact that willpower operates physically, like a muscle. It depends on how well we rest, and is fuelled by glucose.
Now, great thinkers and scientists at great centers of learning all over, including Europe and Canada, are doing the same kind of research with similar results. Just to mention a few, the book quotes what is happening at Duke University, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania—the first university in North American to open a laboratory for the study of psychology. laboratory—and Yale.
The bottom line is? This book, as a google search will quickly show, is not filled with pseudo science. It contains essential evidence-based science information, which we ignore at our peril.
Nobody needs to leave the Forum, folks. If some of you aren’t interested in what others write, it’s very simple not to respond.
I agree. Now may I ask: Is it wise for members of such an important forum as CFI to simply ignore what is now being recognised, world-wide, as the exciting new science of self-control?
In the book, WILLPOWER—Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength—the story of this new science is told by the scientist, researcher, professor of social psychology and author of more than 450 scientific papers, Roy M. Baumeister, of Florida State University who made it happen. He was helped to write the book by the award winning science writer of the New York Times, John Tierney.
Baumeister’s research clearly shows that this new science, is about things which lie at the curious intersection of science and behaviour. These things are affecting almost every aspect of our lives—why we do, or do not, procrastinate; yield to dangerous temptations; exercise regularly; save for retirement; deal with addictions more efficiently and more intelligently and other elusive areas of human psychology—why we go on thwarting ourselves when we really know better. Interestingly, research discovered the fact that willpower operates physically, like a muscle. It depends on how well we rest, and is fuelled by glucose.
Now, great thinkers and scientists at great centers of learning all over, including Europe and Canada, are doing the same kind of research with similar results. Just to mention a few, the book quotes what is happening at Duke University, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania—the first university in North American to open a laboratory for the study of psychology. laboratory—and Yale.
The bottom line is? This book, as a google search will quickly show, is not filled with pseudo science. It contains essential evidence-based science information, which we ignore at our peril.
... Now, great thinkers and scientists at great centers of learning all over, including Europe and Canada, are doing the same kind of research with similar results. Just to mention a few, the book quotes what is happening at Duke University, Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania—the first university in North American to open a laboratory for the study of psychology—and Yale.
The bottom line is? This book, as a google search will quickly show, is not filled with pseudo science. It contains essential evidence-based science information, which we ignore at our peril.
You make two comments. First one:
Yeah, this isn’t new, and it’s not being ignored.
“Not being ignored, you say?” Then—if what we have here is a new and real science, the science of Will+Power—does it makes sense to you that this thread about WILLPOWER is dumped in the pseudo-science section? Also, I prefer having the kind of dialogue that is on topic—one minus the ad hominems and dissing. However, mindful that there ARE posters who feel the need to blow off steam, and who get some relief from stress when they slap a cheek or two, I agree to post the following thread: State Your Beefs, Ad hominems, Whatever, Here.
Then you are free to begin by writing ...................... (name), here is how I feel about you and what you said: .......................!
Then you comment:
So tell us how it reveals G~O~D!
What do you mean by “it”? Are you aware that ‘G~O~D’ is a special acronym I use? It is not a noun designating a thing with dimensions.
“Not being ignored, you say?” Then—if what we have here is a new and real science, the science of Will+Power—does it makes sense to you that this thread about WILLPOWER is dumped in the pseudo-science section?
RLK, the only non pseudo - scientific item that you’ve produced in this thread is the link to Baumeister’s research; which does not fit into your concept of “pneumatology”. From that, it makes sense (to most of the members here) that this thread belongs in the Pseudoscience sub - forum.
“Not being ignored, you say?” Then—if what we have here is a new and real science, the science of Will+Power—does it makes sense to you that this thread about WILLPOWER is dumped in the pseudo-science section?
RLK, the only non pseudo - scientific item that you’ve produced in this thread is the link to Baumeister’s research; which does not fit into your concept of “pneumatology”. From that, it makes sense (to most of the members here) that this thread belongs in the Pseudoscience sub - forum.
I agree MA. And note that REV LGK ignored the part about this research not being new. All his crap about pneumatology and past life memories clearly fits in the Pseudoscience forum.
If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number? No. Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.” David Hume
This is exactly what the Rev has done this entire thread, posting ideas which lack mathematical rigor and empirical evidence. His ideas are sophistry and illusion.
